LAW OFFICES 

 

GAROFALO GOERLICH HAINBACH PC 

 

1200 NEW HAMPSHIRE AVENUE NW · SUITE 590 · WASHINGTON DC 20036-6802 

TELEPHONE 202 776-3970 · FACSIMILE 202 776-3975 

WWW.GGH-AIRLAW.COM

December 2, 2016 

VIA FDMS 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Office of Rulemakings 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20591 

Re: Petition of Southern Air for Renewal of Exemption No. 9845C; 

Docket No. FAA-2004-19718

Ladies/Gentlemen: 

 Southern Air Inc. (Southern), pursuant to Section 11.61 of the Federal Aviation 

Regulations, petitions for renewal of Exemption No. 9845C granting relief from FAR 

121.434(c)(1)(ii) to permit Southern to continue to substitute a qualified, authorized company 

check airman in place of a Federal Aviation Administration inspector to observe a qualifying 

pilot-in-command (PIC) while that PIC performs prescribed duties during at least one flight that 

includes a takeoff and landing, when completing initial or upgrade training as specified in FAR 

121.424. FAA initially granted Southern an exemption from FAR 121.434(c)(1)(ii) on 

December 29, 2004 (Exemption No. 8464) and continually has renewed or reissued that 

exemption, most recently as Exemption No. 9845C on January 21, 2015. By its terms 

Exemption No. 9845C (copy enclosed) expires March 31, 2017. Southern requests that a further 

renewal be granted prior to that date and remain effective for at least two years. 

 Justification for renewal of Exemption No. 9845C is the same as for the original 

Exemption No. 8464 issued to Southern on December 29, 2004. In granting Exemption No. 

8464, FAA determined that relief was in the public interest inasmuch as it would reduce 

“unnecessary costs that may influence the price of services to the public” and would “improve 

the airline’s ability to provide on-time, dependable air service.” Exemption No. 8464, pp. 1-2. 

FAA further stated that such an exemption would not adversely affect safety, provided that 

Southern complied with certain conditions and limitations. 

Southern submits that the circumstances stated in its initial petition for exemption in this 

docket are unchanged and that Southern has remained in compliance with all exemption 
GAROFALO GOERLICH HAINBACH PC

Federal Aviation Administration 

December 2, 2016 

Page 2 

conditions and limitations.1 Southern submits that exemption relief from FAR 121.434(c)(1)(ii) 

continues to be in the public interest and to have no adverse effect upon safety, as previously 

determined by the FAA. 

 Southern submits that a summary of this petition need not be published in the Federal 

Register as the relief requested is identical to numerous exemptions granted previously, and 

granting this petition would not set a precedent. See FAR 11.87. FAA renewal of Southern’s 

exemption also would be consistent with routine renewals of similar exemptions. See, e.g.,

Exemption No. 6473I granted to Federal Express Corporation, Docket No. FAA-2002-12343 and 

Exemption 9755D granted to Alaska Airlines, Inc., Docket No. FAA-2006-24996. 

 Thank you for your time and attention. If there are any questions, please feel free to 

contact us. 

 Sincerely, 

 

 

 Aaron A. Goerlich 

 Jason E. Maddux 

 GAROFALO GOERLICH HAINBACH PC 

 Counsel for Southern Air Inc. 

Enclosure 

 

1

 In granting Exemption No. 8464A on December 29, 2006, FAA removed as unnecessary the 

condition in Exemption No. 8464 that Southern, as distinguished from the FAA, could conduct no more 

than 50 percent of the operating experience observations during any six-month period. Southern requests 

that the renewal requested here continue to not include this condition, which remains unnecessary.